Norfolk could raise hurdle for citizen petitions

Posted to: News Norfolk

NORFOLK

Several local civic activists said they oppose a proposal city officials will likely approve today that would make it more difficult for residents to challenge council decisions.

The resolution, which will be discussed by the City Council at 2:30 p.m. at City Hall, asks the General Assembly to approve an increase in the number of signatures required for a petition initiative from 4,000 to 8,000.

It also calls for changing the city's recall election procedures.

If the proposed rules were in effect in recent years, the successful Bay Oaks Park and Highland Park petition drives would have fallen short. Both petition drives garnered more than 5,000 signatures in an attempt to force the council to change its mind on development decisions.

In both cases the council voted to reverse its previous zoning decisions before any referendums were held.

"The City Council doesn't want anyone challenging their authority," said Bill Kerry, who headed the Bay Oaks Park Committee petition drive several years ago.

That group gathered 5,396 signatures over city plans to develop 21 vacant acres in East Ocean View into housing. In the end, the city compromised and added park space to its plans.

Earlier this year, a group in the Highland Park neighborhood gathered enough signatures to convince the council to reverse its opinion on whether to allow a new apartment building there.

"I think they're doing this because they saw what citizens can do, and they don't want it to happen again," said Dale Ryder, who heads the Highland Park Civic League.

The ordinance, if approved by the General Assembly, would also abolish a provision in the city code that allows voters to recall council members. Instead, the city would follow state recall procedures as most Virginia cities do.

Portsmouth, Hampton and Lynchburg are the only other Virginia localities with recall provisions that allow council members who do not break the law to be recalled.

Both Norfolk's and the state's provisions allow residents to challenge a sitting council member by gathering signatures on a petition. However, under the city code, the petition leads to a recall election. If proposed changes are approved, Norfolk residents could use the petition drive only to ask a Circuit Court judge to remove a council member solely for malfeasance. There would be no recall election.

Councilman Barclay C. Winn said the council has yet to discuss the proposed changes at length and probably will do so today.

"We could make changes," he said. "I'm for increasing the number of signatures required on a recall but not for throwing it out altogether."

Councilman W. Randy Wright suggested doubling the number of signatures for petition initiatives at a council meeting more than a month ago.

Wright said he is a fan of petition initiatives, noting that he began his political career three decades ago by mounting petition drives to lower real estate taxes and to halt construction of a mega-church in the Roose-velt Gardens area.

He said he gathered 40,000 on two petitions on the real estate tax issue and had more than 14,000 on the church issue.

"I'm all for referendums," he said. "But the number of signatures now is too low."

Kerry disagreed, saying: "It's very difficult to go out and gather 4,000 signatures. They want to put it out of our reach. They don't want anyone challenging them."

Harry Minium, (757) 446-2371, harry.minium@pilotonline.com

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

Educate us on "all the confusion out there?"

What "confusion?"

8,000 signatures is twice as many as 4,000 signatures.

I'm not confused at all.

NO!

Elections coming in May

We'll see how serious the voters are in May. As Mayor Fraim says all the time "we have a referendum every other May"....

Elections coming in May

We'll see how serious the voters are in May. As Mayor Fraim says all the time "we have a referendum every other May"....

These idoits have not met

These idoits have not met the expectations of Norfolk's citizens and taking away our ability to challenge them is thier latest assualt. In May they come up for re-election and the citizens of Norfolk can attack back at that time. We need to let them know this is our city!They are our representives not our rulers!Lets see what they have done for us Councilmen Wynn kept his company afloat by getting the town point landscaping contract,Councilman Riddick thinks only the citizens of norfolk not himself are required to abide by city codes that he voted for,and best of all Coucilman Williams led SPSA to charged the poeple of Norfolk the highest trash fees in the nation!And these poeple think they are doing a good job for us. Please Vote everyone one of the current members out of office.

It's difficult for them to

It's difficult for them to forget that they're here for us, because we're always in their faces every Tuesday and I'm pretty much in their faces pretty much everwhere they turn.

I listened to some discussion on the matter earlier today, and some of the policy seemed very vague and easily manipulated.

Update-

Short term victory for the Citizens of Norfolk. The changes to the charter were voted down until the council could take the time to educate us on 'all the confusion is out there' regarding the issue. Many people spoke against the proposal, a pretty good number for an afternoon meeting- none of them seemed confused to me!

THE START OF TROUBLES

This is the start of bigger problems.
It reminds me of a scenario I was reading about concerning the "recall" of an elected official.
The citizens had the required information and signatures but no one wanted to put up the thousands of dollars for the court.
There are always ways to stop justice and the City of Norfolk has found another one.
This is shameful.

Will the Arrogance ever end?

This is even more reason why city council needs to be reined in. Now they're trying to strip away one of the only safety nets that citizens have. The Water Oaks project is a great example - no one needed the land, the city just wanted to tear down those poor people's homes without just compensation, just like they did at East Beach. Can't wait until His Majesty Randy Wrong can be voted out - schools are decaying but he's spending that damn train! Won't spend the money to keep Willoughby from flooding, but he pays for that damn train. Hope he rots in hell. Talk about being out of touch! City Council should only be allowed to run for one term, and they won't have the time to get "the fix" in.

Council overide of citizens

Sounds like we need a petition to overturn any council action on the matter and remove the council before the legislature -which meets in January- can act on this.

Beat them at their game

Before they pass it, start a petition drive, with the current required minimum, to force a public vote on this. That would be beautiful. Then, start the recall procedures.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: News rss feed   



Toolbox


special features